[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian/dists/stable/main/binary-i386/devel/binutils-mipsel-linux.deb, gcc-mipsel-linux.deb, etc.

Hi Bradley,

On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Bradley D. LaRonde wrote:

> Why not?  And if so, where?

> (What I mean is why not have deb files availble to for cross-building?)

The primary issue seems to be that building the cross-tools is difficult to
orchestrate at the source package level, and can severely hinder autobuilders
for platforms that have enough trouble building /one/ gcc binary package in a
timely manner.

I do have gcc-2.95-mipsel, binutils-mipsel, and friends on my x86 system,
which I built from the standard source packages, but there just doesn't seem
to be a suitable way to upload such packages to the Debian archives (at least,
not a way that's universally agreed to be suitable).  I don't want to upload
(or maintain!) a completely redundant set of source packages just for a single
cross-builder on a single host architecture, and the maintainers of the
affected packages don't like any of the other options; in fact, the gcc 3.0
packages, last I saw, had had a lot of support for cross-builders stripped out
of them because it was more hassle than it was worth.

I'm happy to lend a hand and some experience to anyone who's interested in
trying to come up with a workable scheme that lets us provide more cross-build
tools with the Debian system, but given the scope of the problems that would
need to be overcome, I've been content to build local packages for my own
cross-building up to now.

FWIW, I am rather fond of cross-compiling personally:

$ dpkg -S /usr/bin/*-ar
binutils-arm: /usr/bin/arm-linux-ar
binutils-m68k: /usr/bin/m68k-linux-ar
binutils-mipsel: /usr/bin/mipsel-linux-ar
binutils-powerpc: /usr/bin/powerpc-linux-ar

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Reply to: